Brakes G60's vs UFO's and other combos............
cord4530 at uidaho.edu
Tue Feb 17 02:51:08 EST 2004
>>I'm no brake engineer, but I
>>> theorize that if I compare two like kind setups braking with the ABS working
>>> and then not engaging the ABS by modulating the brakes at threshold, I'll bet
>>> the ABS will have a longer stopping distance leading to less heat generated on
>>> the brake rotor and its components.
> Not so! Its the same amount of kinetic energy being converted into heat,
> independent of the braking system.
Actually, Scott's right on this one. While it *is* the same amount of
energy (at least for all practical purposes), the energy is converted in
a shorter amount of time -- meaning more power. Power is a rate of
>>The brakes convert car velocity movement into kinetic heat into the rotor
>>> during stopping. The result is, you have generated more brake heat in a
>>> shorter braking distance.
> Your terminology is so screwed up that who is to question?
In this case, that's not quite right. WE could say that brakes convert
kinetic energy (from vehicle velocity) in to thermal energy by friction.
But there is no more heat generated by stopping faster than stopping
slow. But since the power is greater, the brake component temperatures
will be greater.
Still, this is a pretty small difference in time between ABS stopping
and threshold stopping, so the power difference is probably negligible.
I remember when ABS was becoming more common, that most published
numbers for stopping distance reported that stopping with ABS took
longer than w/o ABS engaging. However, in more recent magazine articles
this seems to have switched. Aside from tire lockup w/o ABS, I can't see
how a car would stop faster with ABS engaged.
Anyone else notice this?
Mechanical Engineer - Engine Research Facility
University of Idaho
More information about the 200q20v